Not quite. Planning for battery failures is hard because they have different failure modes. For example, the battery could fail to dead short, which is the functional equivalent of an cell in the SSD dying and then setting the SSD on fire. Or the cell might just actually catch fire during normal operation if you overload it.
To my knowledge, the best and safest battery system is to have each battery individually monitored by a charge controller with the capability to fully disconnect the battery at will.
The downside is that this will be expensive so people usually settle for just eating the rare chance of a dead short battery.
Additionally, batteries that you just leave around doing nothing will probably die at some point too. You don't want it sitting around you want to use it for efficiency or else you swap your battery and find out it was dead too.
To reduce burst loads on batteries you could use supercaps if you find ones that can handle the voltage and current (that will be very expensive).
> Additionally, batteries that you just leave around doing nothing will probably die at some point too.
This wouldn't happen if batteries were designed to act like nuclear reactors, where the "fuel" (the fuel rods; the electrolyte) can be completely removed from the substrate that makes it react (the neutron medium; the anode+cathode.)
But a battery that can withdraw its anode+cathode from the solution would be damned expensive. It'd make more sense as an architecture if you had just a few, super-large battery cells, e.g. giant vats of lead-acid.
It might be possible to design regular battery cells such that they wouldn't start degrading until they were first exposed to a voltage load, though. (I think the "50 year" Duracell NiCd batteries have this property—they probably have an antifuse oxide layer between the anode/cathode and the electrolyte, that gets broken down when you put load on the circuit.)
That reminds me of a recent NASA project where they kinda built small nuclear fission batteries with less than a couple tons of weight (IIRC down to 100kg)
These would be kinda neat as off-grid generators and you can take the nuclear element out (and it would last longer but still be radioactive).
To my knowledge, the best and safest battery system is to have each battery individually monitored by a charge controller with the capability to fully disconnect the battery at will.
The downside is that this will be expensive so people usually settle for just eating the rare chance of a dead short battery.
Additionally, batteries that you just leave around doing nothing will probably die at some point too. You don't want it sitting around you want to use it for efficiency or else you swap your battery and find out it was dead too.
To reduce burst loads on batteries you could use supercaps if you find ones that can handle the voltage and current (that will be very expensive).